Recent Entries

Seeking References on Cellphone Surveillance

Cuil not so Cool

New “Cuil” Search Engines Decides User Logs Aren’t Necessary

Local Library uses RFID to Manage Materials, but Privacy Concerns Abound

Visibility of Googe’s Privacy Policy Depends on Where you Live

A Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Online Video

Google (Quietly/Oddly) Adds Privacy Link to Homepage

Court Orders Google to Give All YouTube User Histories to Viacom


Categories

4S  4th Amendment  A2K  AOIR  AOL  Academic  Amateur data mining  Andrew Keen  Ask.com  Auto Black Boxes  Behavioral targeting  Blogging  Books  CEPE  CFP08  Cellphones  Censorship  China  ChoicePoint  Conferences  Constitution  Contextual Integrity  Cookies  Copyright  DRM  DSRC  Dan Solove  Data Aggregation  Data mining  Data retention  Dataveillance  Dissertation  DoubleClick  Ethics  Facebook  Facial recognition  Flickr  GPS  Gmail  Google  Google News  Google Print  HealthVault  Humor  IINW  ISP  Identity  Identity 2.0  Information theory  Intellectual Privacy  Intellectual Property  Interfaces  Internet  Knowledge Tools  Law  Libraries  Locational privacy  Media  Media Ecology  Microsoft  MySpace  Netaveillance  Networked Vehicle Systems  Online Privacy  Orkut  PORTIA  Paid Search  Perfect Search  Personal  Personalized Search  Privacy  Privacy in Public  Privacy on the Roads  Publications  Quaero  RFID  Reputation systems  Riya  Search Engine Bias  Search Engines  Search privacy  Siva Vaidhyanathan  Social networks  Spyware  Street View  Surveillance  Talks  Technology  Technology & Society  TrackMeNot  Uncategorized  Values in Design  Web 2.0  Wi-fi  Wikipedia  Yahoo  YouTube  eHealth  iPod  iTunes 

Rss Feed




  • Powered by FeedBlitz
  • Campaigns

    Join EFF Today

    I support individual rights

    Stop Data Retention

    I am a hard bloggin' scientist. Read the Manifesto.

    Meta

    Creative Commons License

    Visibility of Googe’s Privacy Policy Depends on Where you Live

    Posted on Friday, July 11th, 2008 at 9:11 pm

    Following up on Google’s recent decision (over the 4th of July holiday weekend) to sneak a link to its privacy policy onto its homepage and SERPs, Ted Byfield did a quick analysis of the realative visbility of the privacy policy on Google’s various country-specific hompages:

    …a quick survey of “European” Google sites (adapted from some random list of country-code TLDs) turns up interesting data:

    The following national/language pages don’t have privacy links: Shqip [Albanian], Bosnia and Hercegovina, Bulgaria, Belarus, Switzerland, Croatia, Iceland, Moldova, Malta, Norway, Slovenia, Slovakia, and Ukraine.

    The following national/language pages do have privacy links: Andorra, Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Finland, France, Georgia, Greece, Gibraltar, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, the Isle of Man, Italy, Jersey, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, San Marino, Turkey, and the UK.

    So the 80,058 residents of the Isle of Man enjoy easy access to Google’s privacy policies, while 46,372,700 Ukranian’s are left in the dark about what personal information Google collects and what they do with it. Seems if you’re not a part of the EU, Google just doesn’t see fit to provide that 7-letter link to help you understand the privacy implications of using its services.

    Byfield’s analysis:

    The placement of a privacy link may seem trivial—in fact, in itself, I think it is trivial (though no more so than an overweening emphasis on front-page aesthetics). But peculiarities about how even trivia like this is implemented can reveal a lot about corporate attitudes and behavior. In this case, Google’s convenient exceptionalism shows how it defers to the varied and minimal standards of national laws rather than defining a rigorous, affirmative standard and applying it transnationally. In doing so, it’s acknowledging that the governments of the states in which it operates will decide whether and when it will “be evil.”

    Leave a Reply